A week ago, Michael Steele made history when he was elected Chairman of the Republican National Committee. Steele, the former lieutenant governor of Maryland, is the first black to lead the party. Coming on the heels of Barack Obama’s historic inauguration, we certainly are witnessing unprecedented diversity in some of our country’s most venerated political institutions.

It will be years before we truly know the full impact of President Obama and Chairman Steele’s service. The fact that these two men are simultaneously leading their parties, though, allows us to ask critical questions about the relationship between black voters and political parties.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties have had a checkered racial history. The Democratic Party was the party of slavery, Jim Crow and obstruction of civil rights for generations. The Republican Party was the party of the Compromise of 1877 and the Southern Strategy. Indeed, when most scholars of black partisan behavior describe the choices that black voters make, they assert that black voters pick the party that at the time is “the lesser of two evils.”

There are times, such as from 1948 to 1960, when both parties have similar civil rights positions. In that post-war period, while most black voters voted Democratic, Republicans were still able to compete for black votes. The roughly 9-to-1 vote ratios that we are accustomed to seeing today have been the reality only since 1964, when Democrats gained a perceptual advantage on civil rights because of Lyndon Johnson’s advocacy of civil rights.

It is very unlikely that the GOP will reform quickly its image among blacks. However, under Steele’s leadership, the party may be able to lay the groundwork for future competitiveness. The party will not survive unless it attracts young voters, voters from outside the South, black voters and Latino voters. Steele’s record is a testament to his willingness to reach beyond normal Republican environs.

When he ran for the U.S. Senate from Maryland in 2006, he made a concerted effort to mobilize black support, sensing dissatisfaction among black voters who believed the Democrats were ignoring their interests. Because of his efforts (which included endorsements from Russell Simmons, Kathy Hughes and Wayne Curry, the former executive of majority-black Prince George’s County), Steele won 25 percent of the black vote, better than average for a Republican. I would expect that as RNC chairman, Steele will continue his quest to reach out to these voters. To have the major political parties compete for the black vote is a good thing. When parties assume that blacks are only going to vote one way, it leads to complacency.

One party has little incentive to address interests of concern to blacks; the other party can take black interests for granted, even if blacks are a vital part of the coalition. If blacks ever expect to improve their standard of living or end systemic inequality as a result of this new descriptive representation, they must keep the parties (and their standard-bearers) on their toes. The best way to do that is to be prepared to vote unconventionally.

Andra Gillespie is an assistant professor in the political science department. Her upcoming book, Whose Black Politics? Cases in Post-Racial Black Leadership, includes a chapter on Michael Steele by Tyson King-Meadows of UMBC.